Rezensionen Jeff Thoss, When Storyworlds Collide. Metalepsis in Popular Fiction, Film and Comics (Studies in Intermediality 7). Leiden/ Boston: Brill-Rodopi, 2015. Keyvan Sarkhosh In the wake of Genette‟s (2004) return to metalepsis - a term he himself originally introduced to the field of literary narratology in his seminal study Narrative Discourse (1972/ 1993) - and along the broader research on selfreference and metareference, the phenomenon of metalepsis has aroused a substantial amount of interest among literary scholars during the last decade. It is safe to say that the recent wave of involvement with metalepsis is not only due to its multifaceted and ambivalent effects - metalepsis being prone to elicit confusion as much as amusement - but also, and in particular, to the fact that metalepsis is conceived as a genuine transmedial and transgeneric phenomenon (cf. Klimek 2009; Wolf 2005). Moreover, metalepsis as a prototypical anti-illusionist device is by no means solely confined to high-brow literature and other forms of avant-gardist art, but also features prominently in a large variety of works of popular culture (cf. the contributions in Kukkonen & Klimek 2011). Quite unmistakably, Jeff Thoss‟s concise study on Metalepsis in Popular Fiction, Film and Comics is born out of these lines of research. As such, Thoss‟s book not only brings together recent conceptualisations of metalepsis and integrates them into a viable theoretical framework of the phenomenon, but also fills a gap in the existing scholarly literature on metalepsis. As Thoss himself points out, despite the fact that metalepsis has firmly been established as a transmedial phenomenon, prior to his book little effort has been made to examine and test this transmedial nature by means of an in-depth analysis that offers a typology of shared metaleptic features and operations across different (narrative) media. By limiting his focus solely to narrative media, Thoss naturally leaves out of account a vast array of metaleptical - or at least quasi-metaleptical - phe- AAA - Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik Band 41 (2016) · Heft Gunter Narr Verlag Tübingen 2 Rezensionen 94 nomena in other media, in particular the visual arts, a limitation the author acknowledges himself in the conclusion. However, Thoss justifies the choice of media he discusses - popular prose fiction, films and comic - with the fact that, as narrative media, all three enable readers or viewers to construct storyworlds (a premise that later turns out to be essential for Thoss‟s typology of metalepsis). Another argument in favour of the media chosen is their alleged affinity to popular culture. The latter argument is particularly relevant to the author‟s overall intentions: Apart from offering a theoretical model of metalepsis as a genuine transmedial phenomenon, Thoss aims at challenging dominant approaches to metalepsis which conceive it as a device that is intricately bound to notions of high literature. While there is certainly some truth to both arguments, I found none completely satisfactory. First of all, one may wonder why the author did not take into consideration other popular narrative media such TV series/ serials, animation or even - to a certain extent - video games. Second, two of the examples discussed - films and comics - undeniably are visual media. To deal with them only in terms of narrative certainly does not do them justice. Moreover, by means of analogy and extension, further instances of popular visual storytelling, such as series pictures or the fotonovela, could and should have been discussed. I believe this would have allowed to draw much more robust conclusions on the genuinely transmedial nature of metalepsis and its popular operationalisations, even more so as Thoss‟s definition of metalepsis and the typology he develops certainly allow for such extensions. One of the greatest merits of this book is that it provides readers with a convincing and viable definition of metalepsis. Based on a concise review of the dominant theories of metalepsis, starting with Gérard Genette‟s original description of the phenomenon, and drawing on concepts from possible worlds theory, in particular Marie-Laure Ryan and Lubomír Doležel, Thoss defines metalepsis as the paradoxical transgression of the line separating the inside from the outside of a storyworld. Unlike Genette, who conceptualises metalepsis as a hierarchical violation of narrative levels, Thoss makes a strong case for metalepsis as a violation of the border between ontologically separate and autonomous worlds. Such worlds can - but do not necessarily have to - be positioned on different hierarchical levels. This definition allows him to differentiate three metaleptical prototypes: (1) storyworld-imaginary world metalepsis: this type comprises transgressions between a storyworld and another imaginary world; (2) storyworld-reality metalepsis, i.e. transgressions between a storyworld and „reality‟; (3) storyworld-discourse metalepsis which refers to all transgressions between a storyworld and the discourse, which includes, among others, border violations between the text and the paratext. However, Thoss concedes that these three types often intermingle and, more importantly, “may also behave differently across various media, be clearly distinct in some and overlap in others.” (24) In order to illustrate his theoretical assumptions concerning the three metaleptical prototypes, Thoss cites a number of examples from fiction, film and comics, with the result that to a large extent the theoretical chapter is made up of an enumeration of metaleptical transgressions across the three media in Rezensionen 95 question. Perhaps this is the crux with metalepsis: in fact, there is not much to theorise. Rather, one can only talk about metalepsis when describing actual instances of metaleptical transgressions. However, this is not on any account Thoss‟s fault, nor is he to blame for being superficial. On the contrary, the strength of the chapter lies in the concise typology of metaleptical prototypes backed by convincing examples. While this typology is well-founded and undoubtedly will prove highly valuable for future studies dealing with metaleptical phenomena, the subsequent theoretical reflections on different functions of metalepsis in high culture and in popular culture are somewhat less convincing. Thoss argues that one cannot deal with cases of metalepsis in popular culture the same way one treats and interprets metalepsis in high literature. Although he concedes that it is almost impossible to discern formal differences, Thoss insists that they serve different functions in these two cultural traditions - and, more importantly, that it is indeed possible to differentiate between high and popular culture “as to some extent discrete” spheres (40): “Popular and high art provide different experiences, different pleasures”, Thoss writes (41), and suggests distinguishing between five uses of metalepsis in popular culture: (1) it is a powerful tool to address (and reject) allegations that popular culture solely serves escapist tendencies and instead to “celebrate the power and pleasures of immersion and imagination” (43); (2) putting a spotlight on the author as quasi-omnipotent creator, “metalepsis can be employed to tell allegories about (self-)determinism” (43); (3) metalepsis can serve as a means of parody (44); (4) metalepsis may operate as a sort of quasi-philosophical metareference (45); (5) metalepsis offers entertainment, because it creates “fun and exciting narratives” (46). One must doubt that any of these functions are exclusively limited to popular media. Rather, all of them can also be found among works that have gained the status of high art, even more so as popular entertainment and high culture artistry are by no means mutually exclusive. Whether a cultural object is conceived as „high‟ or „popular‟ is perhaps not as much a question of intrinsic qualities, purposes and functions, as of modes of production, distribution and, most importantly, the way specific audiences make use of such works for their own purposes and gratification. The following three chapters are devoted to applying, in greater detail, the typology worked out in the preceding theoretical chapter to selected examples from popular fiction, film and comics. These chapters serve two purposes: On the one hand, they prove the usefulness and applicability of the threefold typology of metalepsis to narratives from different media, thereby confirming the transmedial nature of the phenomenon. On the other hand, they serve as illustrations of the - purportedly genuine - functions of metalepsis in popular culture. The examples Thoss discusses are-well chosen, yet by no means does he try to cover the whole range of genres of contemporary fiction, films and comics featuring metalepsis. Rather, the author offers an exemplary overview. All three chapters follow the same pattern: For each type of metalepsis Thoss presents one or two examples from each medium before presenting one concluding example which exhibits metaleptical transgressions in all its states. For instance, as case studies from popular fiction, Rezensionen 96 Thoss has chosen two short stories - Final Reward (1988) by Terry Pratchett and Umney‟s Last Case (1993) by Stephen King, which both serve as examples of storyworld-imaginary world metalepsis -, two novels - The Land of Laughs (1980) by Jonathan Carroll, serving as another example of storyworldimaginary world metalepsis, and Sprout Mask Replica (1997) by Robert Rankin as an example of storyworld-discourse metalepsis - and two series of novels - Stephen King‟s heptalogy The Dark Tower (1982-2004) as an example of storyworld-reality metalepsis and finally Jasper Fforde‟s ongoing Thursday Next series (2001-), exhibiting metalepsis in all its states. Thoss‟s observations are insightful and his arguments sound. However, one cannot easily get rid of the impression that writing about metalepsis hardly goes beyond retelling the story and counting paradoxical transgressions. Indeed, in all of his examples, Thoss very much sticks to story. This is not very surprising given that the author solely deals with metalepsis in terms of narrative. However, in doing so, he is sometimes blind for the specifics and peculiarities of the media he refers to, also and in particular in terms of terminology. For instance, one thing I stumbled upon was the author‟s use of the notion of the cinematic narrator in his chapter on film. When discussing Marc Forster‟s Stranger than Fiction (2006) as one of two examples of storyworlddiscourse metalepsis in film - the other being Spike Jonze‟s Adaptation (2002) -, Thoss identifies Emma Thompson‟s off-screen voice, i.e. the voice-over narration of fictional author Karen Eifel, with the cinematic narrator, and in doing so emphasises its similarities to a prose narrator (110). This is not merely too simplifying, it is downright wrong. As Chatman (1990: 134) and others argue, the “cinematic narrator” is a composite of all the cinematic devices employed in a film, not just a voice-over narrator (or the camera). Now this would be a very interesting question: What does metalepsis in film mean if the cinematic narrator is the sum of all possible devices? Thoss does not take such complexities into consideration, which is a serious flaw. For sure, the „narration‟ of Karen Eifel cannot be identified with the film‟s discourse. Rather it is itself subject to the film‟s discourse; the relation-ship between the world of Harold Crick (Will Ferrell) and Karen Eifel is not a storyworld-discourse relationship, but rather an intradiegetic-metadiegetic relationship subordinate to the extradiegetic discourse. A similar case could be made in his chapter on comics when Thoss discusses John Byrne‟s The Sensational She-Hulk (1989) as another example of storyworld-discourse metalepsis and states that the central character She- Hulk not only knows that she is a character in a comic book, but is also aware of her readership. Of course, being a fictional entity, the character does not really possess consciousness and thus simply cannot be aware of her readership. This is merely a play with conventions; she is staged to appear to be aware of it. This is just one of many cases were I would have wished for a wording which reflects that we are not dealing with an ontological fact, but a mere fictional device. Such criticism notwithstanding, the author should be thanked for consolidating the use of both the term and the concept of metalepsis outside of literary criticism. Thoss is absolutely right when he points to the fact that the Rezensionen 97 term metalepsis is hardly established in film studies, and even less so in comic studies which themselves are still an emerging field. Consequently, as a major outcome of Thoss‟s in-depth analyses a strong argument could be made for the use of this term in film and comic studies, substituting competing - either narrower or less succinct - notions such as screen passage, reflexivity or selfreference. As a whole, the book is tightly argued, well-written and thus a pleasure to read. Moreover, Thoss‟s threefold typology of metaleptical transgressions is a more than useful addition to the existing literature and theory on metalepsis. While the book contributes somewhat less to ongoing debates on the relationship between high and popular culture, it offers an invaluable resource for anyone working on metalepsis as a genuinely transmedial phenomenon. References Chatman, Seymour (1990). Coming to Terms: The Rhetoric of Narrative in Fiction and Film. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP. Genette, Gérard (1972/ 1993). Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP. Genette, Gérard (2004). Métalepse: De la figure à la figuration. Paris: Seuil. Klimek, Sonja (2009). “Metalepsis and Its (Anti-)Illusionist Effects in the Arts, Media and Role-Playing Games”. In: Werner Wolf (ed.). Metareference across Media: Theory and Case Studies. Studies in Intermediality 5. Amsterdam/ New York: Rodopi. 169-187. Kukkonen, Karin & Sonja Klimek (eds.). (2011). Metalepsis in Popular Culture. Narratologia 28. Berlin/ New York: de Gruyter. Wolf, Werner (2005). “Metalepsis as a Transgeneric and Transmedial Phenomenon: A Case Study of the Possibilities of „Exporting‟ Narratological Concepts”. In: Jan Christoph Meister (ed.). Narratology Beyond Literary Criticism: Mediality, Disciplinarity. Narratologia 6. Berlin/ New York: de Gruyter. 83-107. Keyvan Sarkhosh Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics Frankfurt am Main, Germany